模糊作为隐性知识披露的资源

Alessio Ferrari, P. Spoletini, S. Gnesi
{"title":"模糊作为隐性知识披露的资源","authors":"Alessio Ferrari, P. Spoletini, S. Gnesi","doi":"10.1109/RE.2015.7320405","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Interviews are the most common and effective means to perform requirements elicitation and support knowledge transfer between a customer and a requirements analyst. Ambiguity in communication is often perceived as a major obstacle for knowledge transfer, which could lead to unclear and incomplete requirements documents. In this paper, we analyse the role of ambiguity in requirements elicitation interviews. To this end, we have performed a set of customer-analyst interviews to observe how ambiguity occurs during requirements elicitation. From this direct experience, we have observed that ambiguity is a multi-dimensional cognitive phenomenon with a dominant pragmatic facet, and we have defined a phenomenological framework to describe the different types of ambiguity in interviews. We have also discovered that, rather than an obstacle, the occurrence of an ambiguity is often a resource for discovering tacit knowledge. Starting from this observation, we have envisioned the further steps needed in the research to exploit these findings.","PeriodicalId":132568,"journal":{"name":"2015 IEEE 23rd International Requirements Engineering Conference (RE)","volume":"52 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2015-11-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"26","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Ambiguity as a resource to disclose tacit knowledge\",\"authors\":\"Alessio Ferrari, P. Spoletini, S. Gnesi\",\"doi\":\"10.1109/RE.2015.7320405\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Interviews are the most common and effective means to perform requirements elicitation and support knowledge transfer between a customer and a requirements analyst. Ambiguity in communication is often perceived as a major obstacle for knowledge transfer, which could lead to unclear and incomplete requirements documents. In this paper, we analyse the role of ambiguity in requirements elicitation interviews. To this end, we have performed a set of customer-analyst interviews to observe how ambiguity occurs during requirements elicitation. From this direct experience, we have observed that ambiguity is a multi-dimensional cognitive phenomenon with a dominant pragmatic facet, and we have defined a phenomenological framework to describe the different types of ambiguity in interviews. We have also discovered that, rather than an obstacle, the occurrence of an ambiguity is often a resource for discovering tacit knowledge. Starting from this observation, we have envisioned the further steps needed in the research to exploit these findings.\",\"PeriodicalId\":132568,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"2015 IEEE 23rd International Requirements Engineering Conference (RE)\",\"volume\":\"52 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2015-11-05\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"26\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"2015 IEEE 23rd International Requirements Engineering Conference (RE)\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1109/RE.2015.7320405\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"2015 IEEE 23rd International Requirements Engineering Conference (RE)","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1109/RE.2015.7320405","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 26

摘要

访谈是执行需求引出和支持客户与需求分析师之间的知识转移的最常见和最有效的方法。沟通中的歧义通常被认为是知识转移的主要障碍,这可能导致需求文档不清晰和不完整。在本文中,我们分析了歧义在需求引出访谈中的作用。为此,我们执行了一组客户分析师访谈,以观察在需求引出期间歧义是如何发生的。从这一直接经验中,我们观察到歧义是一种以语用为主导的多维认知现象,我们定义了一个现象学框架来描述访谈中不同类型的歧义。我们还发现,歧义的出现往往是发现隐性知识的资源,而不是障碍。从这一观察开始,我们设想了研究中需要采取的进一步步骤,以利用这些发现。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Ambiguity as a resource to disclose tacit knowledge
Interviews are the most common and effective means to perform requirements elicitation and support knowledge transfer between a customer and a requirements analyst. Ambiguity in communication is often perceived as a major obstacle for knowledge transfer, which could lead to unclear and incomplete requirements documents. In this paper, we analyse the role of ambiguity in requirements elicitation interviews. To this end, we have performed a set of customer-analyst interviews to observe how ambiguity occurs during requirements elicitation. From this direct experience, we have observed that ambiguity is a multi-dimensional cognitive phenomenon with a dominant pragmatic facet, and we have defined a phenomenological framework to describe the different types of ambiguity in interviews. We have also discovered that, rather than an obstacle, the occurrence of an ambiguity is often a resource for discovering tacit knowledge. Starting from this observation, we have envisioned the further steps needed in the research to exploit these findings.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
The Personal Information Security Assistant Can you intentionally design a product that is Cool? (keynote) Change impact analysis for Natural Language requirements: An NLP approach Assessment of risk perception in security requirements composition Using real options to manage Technical Debt in Requirements Engineering
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1